The TDL Benning Complaint Thread Department

[kanucks25]

1 minute ago, Jimmy McGill said:

so yeah, no: https://vancouversun.com/news/community-blogs/good-ridance-to-canucks-ryan-kesler-and-his-me-first-attitude

 

But but Benning coulda... shoulda..... 

 

Hardball? do you understand what it would have done to the room to bring Kesler back after he and his agent demanded out? and made it difficult? 

 

You seem to like the create revisions of things in your head and proceed to argue about it. 

I 100% understand the merits of getting Kesler out of the dressing room ASAP. So I don't necessarily blame Benning for pulling the trigger even if he knew the value wasn't all there.

 

However, a couple things:

 

First: I think a more experienced, perhaps a more shrewd GM would not have let Kesler hold him hostage the way Benning did. I don't see a guy like Lou Lamoreillo or Doug Wilson or even Joe Sakic (who really stuck to his guns on the Duchene front and made a fantastic deal at the end) would have let it play out the way it did.

 

Secondly, and most importantly: Kesler's trade restriction did not force Benning to acquire the age-gap return he did, that was all based on his plan. This is my main issue with whole trade and Benning in general; way too many assets wasted on trying to retool on the fly instead of accepting the rebuild from the start.

[kanucks25]

2 hours ago, debluvscanucks said:

See the thing is, you have the luxury of hindsight on your side...GM's in the moment don't.  Richardson was 30 when he left...that's starting to edge toward "old" in the NHL.  Richardson got a whopping 3 goals and was a -24 last year with his 15 points.  Were you upset then?   Don't let that 4 goal game  against a prospect goaltender just breaking in convince you on its own.  

Things like the Kesler trade, the Gudbranson trade, the Eriksson signing etc. don't look bad just in hindsight. Pretty much everyone that wasn't a Canucks homer could see from day 1 that these were awful moves.

 

Just because one person didn't see something coming doesn't mean another person didn't, either. The second person isn't looking at it with 20/20 hindsight, perhaps they just had better foresight.

 

The hindsight argument in defense in Benning is truly baffling. His moves have never been accepted universally as positive moves at the time they were made. Many people took issue with the direction of the team from the start of his tenure.

[JM_]

7 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

 

 

Secondly, and most importantly: Kesler's trade restriction did not force Benning to acquire the age-gap return he did, that was all based on his plan. This is my main issue with whole trade and Benning in general; way too many assets wasted on trying to retool on the fly instead of accepting the rebuild from the start.

Thats your take on it. Given the Sedins, other vet's and Lindens mandate I don't see what other choice he had. Tear down was not in the cards until they fired Willie. 

[kanucks25]

Just now, Jimmy McGill said:

Thats your take on it. Given the Sedins, other vet's and Lindens mandate I don't see what other choice he had. Tear down was not in the cards until they fired Willie. 

But why exactly?

 

Even if all the NTCs that Benning inherited did not waive and just let their contracts expire, why did he have to acquire retool assets instead of rebuild assets?

[YummyCakeFace]

Watch Benning give Edler a NTC 

[Baggins]

5 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

The evidence is that we know for a fact that Benning's plan from the start was the "age-gap re-tool" and not the "scorched-earth rebuild".

 

That's how we know he targeted players like Sbisa and Bonino over a package of prospects and picks.

I know for a fact from day 1 both Benning and Linden said they were going to "transition to a younger team". And they did have a monstrous age gap. One roster player under 27 and no NHL ready prospect on the farm. Pretty much anything from 18 to 25 would be filling the gap.

 

He traded for Vey - a prospect. Clendenning, - another prospect. Baertschi and Grandlund - both prospects. None of these guys had established themselves in the NHL. Why did he trade for prospects from other teams if he was opposed to getting any from Anaheim? 

 

You haven't provided any evidence Anaheim was actually willing to move prospects or picks or if Benning asked for anything other than Sbisa or Bonino. There's two sides in every trade and it wasn't Benning negotiating from a position of strength.

[J-Dizzle]

2 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

But why exactly?

 

Even if all the NTCs that Benning inherited did not waive and just let their contracts expire, why did he have to acquire retool assets instead of rebuild assets?

I hate to say this because I love Linden as a Canuck... but did you ever listen to him talk?  He wanted a competitive team for the vets (Sedins /Edler/Burrows) hence the retool assets instead of the rebuild. Was it the right decision?  That’s debatable.... can you pin it on Benning, I think that’s significantly less debatable. 

[kanucks25]

15 minutes ago, Baggins said:

He traded for Vey - a prospect. Clendenning, - another prospect. Baertschi and Grandlund - both prospects. None of these guys had established themselves in the NHL. Why did he trade for prospects from other teams if he was opposed to getting any from Anaheim? 

These players you mention weren't prospects, they were reclamation projects. Do you think other teams actually willingly give up good players under the age of 24 years old for 2nd round picks? No, teams hold onto these players with a death grip unless you're giving them back an equally valuable roster player.

 

For example. Would you take a 2nd rounder for Gaudette right now? Of course not. But would you do it for Gaunce? Of course you will. That's what Benning did: he scoured the league for Gaunce type prospects hoping something would click. I give him credit for Baerstchi because he worked out and if it wasn't for his uncertain future due to health, probably would make a good #5 or #6 forward on a good team going forward. However, Baertschi panning out was not worth all the assets we gave up in all of Benning's retool transactions combined.

 

He didn't target prospects 20 or under that still needed to develop. He targeted players over 20 years-old that other teams didn't believe in anymore.

 

15 minutes ago, Baggins said:

\You haven't provided any evidence Anaheim was actually willing to move prospects or picks or if Benning asked for anything other than Sbisa or Bonino. There's two sides in every trade and it wasn't Benning negotiating from a position of strength.

There's no evidence that Benning couldn't have asked for something other than what we got.

 

There is evidence that Benning targeted Bonino and Sbisa because they fell in line with his other targets and plan overall.

[86Viking]

3 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

Things like the Kesler trade, the Gudbranson trade, the Eriksson signing etc. don't look bad just in hindsight. Pretty much everyone that wasn't a Canucks homer could see from day 1 that these were awful moves.

 

Just because one person didn't see something coming doesn't mean another person didn't, either. The second person isn't looking at it with 20/20 hindsight, perhaps they just had better foresight.

 

The hindsight argument in defense in Benning is truly baffling. His moves have never been accepted universally as positive moves at the time they were made. Many people took issue with the direction of the team from the start of his tenure.

Rebuild should have started when he arrived, but lets see who he can lure here to Vancouver july 1. Also see if he can make a trade at the draft, don't cave into Edler either JB...

[Baggins]

1 hour ago, kanucks25 said:

These players you mention weren't prospects, they were reclamation projects. Do you think other teams actually willingly give up good players under the age of 24 years old for 2nd round picks? No, teams hold onto these players with a death grip unless you're giving them back an equally valuable roster player.

Rubbish. Teams move prospects that are approaching waiver eligible that they don't have room for because of depth. These guys are traded because they have value and would be lost for nothing otherwise. Teams only hold on with a death grip until faced with losing them for nothing. Then they look to trade them.

 

1 hour ago, kanucks25 said:

There's no evidence that Benning couldn't have asked for something other than what we got.

 

There is evidence that Benning targeted Bonino and Sbisa because they fell in line with his other targets and plan overall.

I highly doubt what he got was what he first asked for. I'm not that naïve. Unlike EA trades are negotiated back and forth. What one wants versus what the other is willing to give and finding something mutually agreeable. Where each side starts the negotiation is seldom the finished deal. Do you honestly believe he simply asked for Sbisa, Bonino and their first and the deal was done in 3 minutes? This went on for a few days. Chicago also made some offers but in the end bowed out. Bottom line: both teams Kesler was willing to go to would need to shed cap to fit him in. That pretty much guaranteed one or two NHL contracts of fairly equivalent value going back the other way.

 

Other targets like Vey, Clendenning, Pedan, Etem, Baertschi, and Granlund. All young guys yet to establish themselves in the NHL.Benning traded for more young unestablished guys than he did established NHL regulars.

[Baggins]

2 hours ago, Canuckster86 said:

Rebuild should have started when he arrived, but lets see who he can lure here to Vancouver july 1. Also see if he can make a trade at the draft, don't cave into Edler either JB...

It did. That's why he traded for young prospects yet to establish themselves in the NHL. That was the start of the rebuild.

 

I have no problem with re-signing Edler. He's still our best d-man and re-signing him doesn't mean he can't be moved down the pairings if or when he's surpassed.

[kanucks25]

1 hour ago, Baggins said:

Rubbish. Teams move prospects that are approaching waiver eligible that they don't have room for because of depth. These guys are traded because they have value and would be lost for nothing otherwise. Teams only hold on with a death grip until faced with losing them for nothing. Then they look to trade them.

Teams don't trade away good NHL ready prospects for middling returns, they make room for them on their roster because they can have a significant impact when it comes to production vs. cap-hit. What Benning accumulated were "prospects" that were about to hit waivers that their original teams weren't very high on so they were willing to let them go for the aforementioned middling returns.

 

Again, the Gaudette example. We already have 4 NHL centers. What's more likely? We trade him for a 2nd round pick or we make room for him on the roster by moving out a vet? The answer is clear, we know what Benning will do this summer.

 

1 hour ago, Baggins said:

Do you honestly believe he simply asked for Sbisa, Bonino and their first and the deal was done in 3 minutes?

Of course not, I'm sure the price started at more than that. However, that doesn't change the fact that, in the end, he targeted and acquired players of a certain age to fit his "plan".

[Tomatoes11]

On 3/2/2019 at 1:04 PM, debluvscanucks said:

Just making a point that it's easy to "assess" things after the fact...GM's have to make moves based on what they feel is right at the time.  Sometimes it works, other times it doesn't. 

 

Were you calling for us to pick Petey?  Bet you weren't.  If we're going to do this, include him in the mix because most were screaming about that pick.  So sometimes it works out better than planned (too).  Let's keep that one in the equation if we're doing the hindsight deal.

I was all for trading down to get ep and liljgren. Might be wrong in liljgren but looks like probably not. 

 

I was dead wrong on wanting Nishchuskin over bo though. 

 

But more right than not with the Nylander, ehlers preference over JV and the Tkachuk preference over Juolevi.

 

Boeser I was neutral with based on Craig buttons scouting report sounding so good for a guy I didn’t really hear much about. 

[Tomatoes11]

On 3/2/2019 at 1:10 PM, debluvscanucks said:

Thing is, when does it end?  It's been a string of "AV, GILLES, WILLIE, NONIS" and it generally follows losing streaks.    Maybe instead of calling for heads of professionals put into place for a reason, we should understand that it isn't a gig without failures and successes.   I hear the word homer more than I do troll/hater.    "More discussion tolerated"?   Probably that's for a reason...because those who have slammed him from day one are learning, over time, that it's not as easy as it looks.

 

It's a discussion board and this is what it's for...however, I hate constant negative at the drop of a hat and as we start to falter.  Ride it out.  Don't call for rash, abrupt responses to everyday occurences.  Teams go on winning and losing streaks...some here called for Marky's head for a long time.     Hmmm.

 

No one is blaming Benning for things out of his control and bad luck. The gudbranson trade was fine because it made sense at the time. Luongo and willie Mitchell loved him, he was young, and a former 4th overall pick big body right shot D. It made sense at the time,

 

That’s the key, it made sense at the time. Many of Benning’s moves frankly didn’t.

[Tomatoes11]

On 3/2/2019 at 2:00 PM, ilduce39 said:

What was the negative impact from that, though?  

 

I get it... Sbisa/Bonino (Sutter) hasn’t lit the world on fire.. but how much further ahead are we with Nick Ritchie or Perlini or Fiala or (other draft pick taken with Anaheim’s higher pick) or if we had targeted, say, Emerson Etem as a return like some people wanted.

 

Kesler held the hammer and tied our hands.. could we have pried Lindholm (former 6OA) out of there?  

 

At a certain point it gets ridiculous trying to rehash these decisions from 5 years ago... especially with 20/20 hindsight.

I would say as long as he got one of Theodore or Vaatanen, which I strongly believe we could have. Vaatanen could play already so probably not him but Theodore was still raw as hell.

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, Tomatoes11 said:

No one is blaming Benning for things out of his control and bad luck. The gudbranson train was fine because it made sense at the time. Luongo and willie Mitchell loved him, he was young, and a former 4th overall pick big body right shot D. It made sense at the time,

 

That’s the key, it made sense at the time. Many of Benning’s moves frankly didn’t.

I liked the Second for Vey, didn’t you?  

My ?God!  How many second round picks did Benning throw away during this (supposed) rebuild?  Didn’t he frigfin’ know a lot of top D men come out of round two?  Never EVER trade round one or two picks, unless you are getting a higher pick, or an elite player back.  That’s a simple rule, but a friggin’ important one!  Listen to ?Alf JB.  I drink Scotch (Bourbon tonight) and I know!  Don’t mess up any more or you’re back to making 50,000 thousand as a rink rat.  

[Tomatoes11]

On 3/2/2019 at 6:11 PM, Baggins said:

I know for a fact from day 1 both Benning and Linden said they were going to "transition to a younger team". And they did have a monstrous age gap. One roster player under 27 and no NHL ready prospect on the farm. Pretty much anything from 18 to 25 would be filling the gap.

 

He traded for Vey - a prospect. Clendenning, - another prospect. Baertschi and Grandlund - both prospects. None of these guys had established themselves in the NHL. Why did he trade for prospects from other teams if he was opposed to getting any from Anaheim? 

 

You haven't provided any evidence Anaheim was actually willing to move prospects or picks or if Benning asked for anything other than Sbisa or Bonino. There's two sides in every trade and it wasn't Benning negotiating from a position of strength.

Um those guys aren’t prospects. Pretty close to reject level.lol heck we gave up on dahlen and he was 20. These guys are 25 + at the time. Well past their critical development period.

 

These days kids play young. Those guys are borderline prospects. I would probably lean towards them being done except maybe Vey.

[Tomatoes11]

On 3/2/2019 at 6:25 PM, kanucks25 said:

These players you mention weren't prospects, they were reclamation projects. Do you think other teams actually willingly give up good players under the age of 24 years old for 2nd round picks? No, teams hold onto these players with a death grip unless you're giving them back an equally valuable roster player.

 

For example. Would you take a 2nd rounder for Gaudette right now? Of course not. But would you do it for Gaunce? Of course you will. That's what Benning did: he scoured the league for Gaunce type prospects hoping something would click. I give him credit for Baerstchi because he worked out and if it wasn't for his uncertain future due to health, probably would make a good #5 or #6 forward on a good team going forward. However, Baertschi panning out was not worth all the assets we gave up in all of Benning's retool transactions combined.

 

He didn't target prospects 20 or under that still needed to develop. He targeted players over 20 years-old that other teams didn't believe in anymore.

 

There's no evidence that Benning couldn't have asked for something other than what we got.

 

There is evidence that Benning targeted Bonino and Sbisa because they fell in line with his other targets and plan overall.

This exactly. Those guys weren’t prospects, they were done like dinner.

[Sedinyoureyesontheprize]

Really hope in the off season JB ships out majority of this roster since most of them can barely even perform in the bottom half of the lineup. 

 

After four years of  witnessing his unwavering loyalty to the players he signs, most of which are 3rd or 4th liners, I doubt any drastic changes will take place.

[Honky Cat]

1 hour ago, Setyoureyesontheprize said:

Really hope in the off season JB ships out majority of this roster since most of them can barely even perform in the bottom half of the lineup. 

 

After four years of  witnessing his unwavering loyalty to the players he signs, most of which are 3rd or 4th liners, I doubt any drastic changes will take place.

He's going to get an opportunity to make some drastic changes this summer. However ,if he does not make the post season next year, he will be replaced.

 

You cannot expect fans to be that patient (6 years),with no tangible results.